Update April 2018-Crossrail and Cycle carriage policy

[Malcolmffc]

Just get a folding cycle. Full size bikes are not appropriate for a commuter railway, especially one that goes underground.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Quite - and here is your problem.

In the UK we have advertised and promoted cycling as an extreme sport, through the achievements of people like Chris Froome, Sir Chris Hoy, Bradley Wiggins, etc.

We have done very little to promote and normalise it as a legitimate means of transport for short distances. 'Infrastructure' typically consists of a few 'shared space' signs and some signs saying "cyclists dismount" when there's reports of conflict (there are mysteriously no signs telling motorists to turn off their engines, get out of their cars, and push their cars across zebra crossings.) A large number of our designated cycle tracks (there are more than you'd think) are simply used as car parks. 'Safety' consists of being told 'wear a helmet and hi-vis,' which will do a fat lot of good for you if you're cut up by a drunk white van man who's busy playing Candy Crush as he goes round a roundabout at 43mph.

When I tell people my preferred means of transport to work is a bicycle, they usually comment on how dangerous it sounds (it isn't any more dangerous than walking.) Or, they ask me if I stop at red lights (I do.)

Statistics show that 80% of motorists ignore 20mph speed limits. Speeding drivers and maim kill considerably more people every year than cyclists jumping red lights.

And yet, if I lied and told my colleagues I drove into work, I wouldn't be asked if I obeyed the speed limit.

Why do you think that might be?

You probably wouldn't find so much resentment and anti cycling stuff if people obeyed the rules of the road, so that means stopping at red traffic lights, lights on at night and no kicking of car doors when you can't filter underneath the queue of vehicles at lights.

Also obeying the conditions of carriage on the trains and that for SWR means no bikes allowed to be taken on trains arriving at Waterloo between 0715 & 1000 and departing between 1645 and 1900 in the suburban area bounded by Basingstoke, Alton, Guildford, Dorking and Reading and all points in between (except the Guildford - Ascot).

It also means that you also obey the on train staff, who have the absolute right to say no to you or any cyclist boarding because there is no more space left. Seating is for sitting on not a bike park nor are gangways, I had one removed from the train for refusing to remove it before.

 

[WelshBluebird]

You probably wouldn't find so much resentment and anti cycling stuff if people obeyed the rules of the road

But you could say the same of motorists surely? Yet driving doesn't seem to carry the same "eugh why would you do that" weight as cycling seems to and gets all the infrastructure you could want.

And that is before you start to look at the number of deaths and injuries caused by motorists. Imagine if the press went as a mad about road deaths as they did when that cyclist killed someone?

 

[telstarbox]

Exactly this. I see at least as many unsafe drivers (particularly texting while driving) as I do unsafe cyclists. The difference is that unsafe driving is much more likely to lead to the death or injury of a third party.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly this. I see at least as many unsafe drivers (particularly texting while driving) as I do unsafe cyclists. The difference is that unsafe driving is much more likely to lead to the death or injury of a third party.

Yes, this. I see a lot of very unsafe driving and attitudes to it (e.g. that driving defensively is not necessary - personally, I think not driving defensively, i.e. causing risk by over-assertiveness, should be prosecutable). And it seems to be accepted.

Speeding is the classic - I doubt any law is flouted quite so openly and proudly. And parking tickets are considered not something to pay quietly and be embarrassed and apologetic about the transgression (which mostly is enforced to ensure fairness for everyone and avoid obstruction), but to openly criticise and look for technicalities to get out of them.

 

[Via Bank]

You probably wouldn't find so much resentment and anti cycling stuff if people obeyed the rules of the road, so that means stopping at red traffic lights, lights on at night and no kicking of car doors when you can't filter underneath the queue of vehicles at lights.

Erm - hold on. Let’s look at that again: EIGHTY PER CENT of drivers ignore twenty mile per hour speed limits. And yes, some of them do run red lights (at a considerably higher speed and with less care than cyclists), drive with inappropriate or no lighting, and park wherever they damn like, including on the footway.

Where is our society’s general resentment towards motorists, then? Why is it socially acceptable to judge me for riding a bicycle, but not for me to judge someone for driving a car?

 

[Mojo]

And what do you have now? restrictions on when you can take your cycle onto tube trains? So its going to be no different really is it

Having had a look at the map, you can't take your bike on deep-tube trains that run underground at any time (exemptions seem to be to allow you to go through the twin-track tunnel past Grange Hill on the Central line, tunnels on the NR stretch of the Bakerloo, and through the covered way to the west of Hammersmith on the Picc).

However bikes are not banned on the Sub-surface lines even where they go through tunnels, nor on the DLR which goes through single-track tunnels (except to Bank), nor on Heathrow Express or HS1; the latter three of which are modern tunnels built to a large size with designated evacuation walkways similar to how the Crossrail tunnel will be. So /if/ (and that is an if) bikes are banned from the Crossrail tunnels, then no it will be quite different to how it is now.

 

[chrish2]

If it's pedestrianised, you can't cycle on it... that's what pedestrianised means. AIUI there has not yet been a decision on whether bikes will be allowed to use Oxford Street.

You're right. The plan in April was looking to make Oxford St no go for cycles when pedestrianised.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...treet-when-it-is-pedestrianised-a3518816.html

 

[Bromley boy]

Having had a look at the map, you can't take your bike on deep-tube trains that run underground at any time (exemptions seem to be to allow you to go through the twin-track tunnel past Grange Hill on the Central line, tunnels on the NR stretch of the Bakerloo, and through the covered way to the west of Hammersmith on the Picc).

However bikes are not banned on the Sub-surface lines even where they go through tunnels, nor on the DLR which goes through single-track tunnels (except to Bank), nor on Heathrow Express or HS1; the latter three of which are modern tunnels built to a large size with designated evacuation walkways similar to how the Crossrail tunnel will be. So /if/ (and that is an if) bikes are banned from the Crossrail tunnels, then no it will be quite different to how it is now.

But isn't it also true that, unlike the last 3 in your list, the Crossrail tunnels will be "deep level" tunnels?

Hence the policy of banning bikes is consistent with the deep level tube (and DLR to bank). The same concerns around bikes preventing easy egress/being dropped down escalators will apply.

 

[bramling]

You probably wouldn't find so much resentment and anti cycling stuff if people obeyed the rules of the road, so that means stopping at red traffic lights, lights on at night and no kicking of car doors when you can't filter underneath the queue of vehicles at lights.

Also obeying the conditions of carriage on the trains and that for SWR means no bikes allowed to be taken on trains arriving at Waterloo between 0715 & 1000 and departing between 1645 and 1900 in the suburban area bounded by Basingstoke, Alton, Guildford, Dorking and Reading and all points in between (except the Guildford - Ascot).

It also means that you also obey the on train staff, who have the absolute right to say no to you or any cyclist boarding because there is no more space left. Seating is for sitting on not a bike park nor are gangways, I had one removed from the train for refusing to remove it before.

One understands and agrees with all of this, but with a but attached. The same can be said for many vehicle drivers (not just cars) - most especially in the London and south-east area - yet this doesn't seem to attract the same amount of hostility.

I'd say the real problem is the country is increasingly becoming overpopulated and overcrowded, especially in the London area. Too many people trying to use a limited space is bound to lead to squabbles and conflict - no matter what the mode of transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You're right. The plan in April was looking to make Oxford St no go for cycles when pedestrianised.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...treet-when-it-is-pedestrianised-a3518816.html

Would in my view be better to have a narrowish cycle lane up the middle.

 

[Bromley boy]

Erm - hold on. Let’s look at that again: EIGHTY PER CENT of drivers ignore twenty mile per hour speed limits. And yes, some of them do run red lights (at a considerably higher speed and with less care than cyclists), drive with inappropriate or no lighting, and park wherever they damn like, including on the footway.

Where is our society’s general resentment towards motorists, then? Why is it socially acceptable to judge me for riding a bicycle, but not for me to judge someone for driving a car?

I think, looking at it from a pedestrian's perspective, cars in London generally stay on the roads and stop at red lights. Bikes (particularly cycle couriers) on the other hand often don't - this is my observation from several years of living, working, being a pedestrian and occasional cyclist in London.*

Far more cyclists than drivers run red lights which causes an obvious risk to pedestrians. This is absolutely epidemic - you've only to stand at any busy junction in central London to witness this. Indeed on more than one occasion I've been sworn at when cycling myself for stopping at a red traffic light, by another cyclist.

I'm not saying some car drivers don't drive dangerously, speed etc but this is less likely to be noticeable to the average pedestrian.

*I also drive a car but haven't driven into central London for at least 10 years

 

[Clip]

Having had a look at the map, you can't take your bike on deep-tube trains that run underground at any time (exemptions seem to be to allow you to go through the twin-track tunnel past Grange Hill on the Central line, tunnels on the NR stretch of the Bakerloo, and through the covered way to the west of Hammersmith on the Picc).

However bikes are not banned on the Sub-surface lines even where they go through tunnels, nor on the DLR which goes through single-track tunnels (except to Bank), nor on Heathrow Express or HS1; the latter three of which are modern tunnels built to a large size with designated evacuation walkways similar to how the Crossrail tunnel will be. So /if/ (and that is an if) bikes are banned from the Crossrail tunnels, then no it will be quite different to how it is now.

Read the person who I quoted - they stated they wanted the same as what they have now when crossrail opens. Which is exactly the restrictions you have outlined above so nothing changes when the Elizabeth line opens.

 

[Holly]

I think I was wrong to reference wheelchairs as I did and I offer my apologies.
What I wanted to put over was that wheel chairs need to be cvonveyed both because it is the right thing to do, and because the law requires it. (And so wheelchairs can be conveyed through the length of Crossrail)
My logic was if the purpose designed trains can carry wheelchairs (and large luggage) throughout the route what is problem with these trains carrying the cycles they are designed to carry into both Paddington or Liverpool street rather than force cyclists to disembark and take to the busy road for some three or four miles more than they do now?
It would be good to use the entire route as a cyclist but I am not at this time complaining about that. I would simply just like to still have what I now have
And as to you more valid point:-
if wheelchairs can get down the stairs you refer to why not cycles? Or in lifts why not cycles?

Indeed, trains should be designed to carry bicycles. And wheelchairs.
However it is not unreasonable on urban or crowded services to require cyclists to stand alongside their bicycles and "strap hang" in place. Provision of compartments free of any seating, luggage racks or other impediments (beyond straps and (if wanted) tie downs for wheelchairs). Same for people with oversized luggage, you could be compelled to stand with your luggage unless the train is lightly loaded or a long distance train.
Substantially empty spaces with external doors, rather like old fashioned "guards compartments" on Mk2 coaches.
And it should be a legal requirement for all new rolling stock to have such provision. Cyclists and those who occasionally have oversized luggage (eg those who use trains to reach airports) should write to their MP.

 

[coppercapped]

Just get a folding cycle. Full size bikes are not appropriate for a commuter railway, especially one that goes underground.

Quite so.

Just as a sanity check I looked up the rules for taking bikes on the S-Bahn in Munich where I used to live. The by-laws state that there is no right to take a bicycle on the S-Bahn but it is permitted under certain circumstances. Essentially bicycles with a wheel size of less than 20 inches and folding bikes are allowed free of charge, bicycles with wheel sizes of 20 inches or greater cost €3. However bikes are not permitted at all between 06.00 and 09.00 and between 16.00 and 18.00. (With the exception of the school holidays when the afternoon restriction is lifted). There is bike (and buggy) space in each set and woe betide anyone who tries to put their bike in the normal vestibules...

Bicycles are not permitted in trams or buses.

I should point out that the centre of Munich is quite small compared to London and most of it along the route of the S-Bahn is in any event pedestrianised. As a result there is very little demand for people to take their bikes to the underground city centre stations - they would get out at the nearest surface station, for example at München-Ost. I have never seen a cyclist taking their bike up an escalator... In fact quite a lot of people lock an old bike to the bike stands at the S and U-Bahn stations they use frequently and pick up the bike when they leave the train. They may have three or four bikes at various points round Munich! Bicycles in Munich are a method of transport, they are not (generally) used to show off one's virility.

 

[Mojo]

But isn't it also true that, unlike the last 3 in your list, the Crossrail tunnels will be "deep level" tunnels?

What is the difference between the Crossrail tunnels, Heathrow (Express) tunnels, DLR and HS1? As far as I can tell, they are all broadly the same (allowing for different sizes to account for varying train sizes) deep level single-track tunnels built to modern standards with an evacuation walkway.

Read the person who I quoted - they stated they wanted the same as what they have now when crossrail opens. Which is exactly the restrictions you have outlined above so nothing changes when the Elizabeth line opens.

The same as they have now is that deep-level tunnels that have been constructed in the past few years with full-size (ie. not tube) trains convey bikes with no problem, notwithstanding the understandable peak hour restrictions.

 

[reddragon]

Why do cyclist think that their rights trump everyone else? They do not pay any cycling related taxes, are uninsured and ignore the law and everyone else's rights.

Bikes block access to trains, delay trains and are a health & safety hazard. I have been on a Turbo getting very late as their bikes block the doors, especially on the North Downs line where the doors open on both sides and they cannot be bothered to move their bikes.

Cyclists even emit more CO2 per mile (additional food production CO2) than a train passenger!

Cyclists need to pay to take their bike on a train, pay taxes and stop being so entitled & arrogant. A cycling licence, insurance and registration number would help too!

 

[sprunt]

Where is our society’s general resentment towards motorists, then? Why is it socially acceptable to judge me for riding a bicycle, but not for me to judge someone for driving a car?

It can be both. The main difference, from my point of view as a pedestrian who neither drives nor cycles is that it's rare to the point of non-existence that I have to avoid a car that's driving towards me along the pavement, but a daily occurrence that I have to avoid a bicycle doing the same thing.

 

[radamfi]

Cyclists even emit more CO2 per mile (additional food production CO2) than a train passenger!

What is your source for this?

 

[matt_world2004]

I have been hit by a cycle 7 times on the pavement in two years through the course of my job including breaking a work issued tablet.

 

[reddragon]

What is your source for this?

https://www.meetup.com/Electric-Bicycles/messages/boards/thread/29145812

Its been followed up in detail and proven by a university study (not yet published). An electric car with one passenger emits less gases than a cyclist , most cars with 2 or more passengers are cleaner than cycling!

The extra food required to cycle per mile comes with production / transport cost in gases (CO2 / NOx etc) and unless you grow food in your garden, most cause very high emissions per mile.

 

[JamesRowden]

https://www.meetup.com/Electric-Bicycles/messages/boards/thread/29145812

Its been followed up in detail and proven by a university study (not yet published). An electric car with one passenger emits less gases than a cyclist , most cars with 2 or more passengers are cleaner than cycling!

The extra food required to cycle per mile comes with production / transport cost in gases (CO2 / NOx etc) and unless you grow food in your garden, most cause very high emissions per mile.

I would suggest that it is in everyone's best interest to do a reasonable amount of exercise.

Sitting in a car/train doesn't make you fitter/healthier

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Ignoring the rests of your post, which I think was somewhat exaggerated, and tarring all cyclists with the sins of some cyclists....

Cyclists even emit more CO2 per mile (additional food production CO2) than a train passenger!

Cycling: Most widely quoted estimate seems to be 21g/km (one source)
Train: Various estimates that generally hover around 50-60g /km (one source)

So, no, cyclists do NOT emit more CO2/mile than train passengers.

There's also an issue that CO2 that you breathe out arguably forms part of the natural carbon cycle - CO2 is absorbed from the atmosphere in the process of growing food, and then released when the food is eaten and digested by animals/people, resulting in no net CO2 emissions. This is in contrast to burning fossil fuels (to power trains), for which you are releasing CO2 that has been in the ground as oil for millions of years, and so is not part of the carbon cycle. (The situation is a bit complicated though when you take into account eating meat, and modern industrial food processes).

 

[AlterEgo]

Why do cyclist think that their rights trump everyone else? They do not pay any cycling related taxes, are uninsured and ignore the law and everyone else's rights.

Bikes block access to trains, delay trains and are a health & safety hazard. I have been on a Turbo getting very late as their bikes block the doors, especially on the North Downs line where the doors open on both sides and they cannot be bothered to move their bikes.

Cyclists even emit more CO2 per mile (additional food production CO2) than a train passenger!

Cyclists need to pay to take their bike on a train, pay taxes and stop being so entitled & arrogant. A cycling licence, insurance and registration number would help too!

What a tiresome rant. Do you feel better?

Not all cyclists ignore the law, or the rights of others. Calm down.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What a tiresome rant. Do you feel better?

Not all cyclists ignore the law, or the rights of others. Calm down.

Also worth considering that many do because they can get away with it - after all, most adult cyclists are also car drivers, so it's an attitude thing, not something that magically happens when you get on a bicycle. Were parking penalties, speed cameras and traffic light cameras removed, I expect we'd see a lot more car misbehaviour, too.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

But unfortunately an ever increasing number do.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I would suggest that it is in everyone's best interest to do a reasonable amount of exercise.

Sitting in a car/train doesn't make you fitter/healthier

Indeed. I haven't seen any attempts to seriously estimate the affect the cycling has on bills for NHS treatment, but I'd be astonished if people cycling didn't save the NHS a significant sum of money - because those people are less likely to need treatment for a range of long term (and very expensive) conditions, whose occurrence is at least in part linked to lack of exercise - most notably including diabetes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But unfortunately an ever increasing number do.

I haven't noticed the proportion to have increased, though the number of cyclists certainly has (and it'd be good if it did so more, too).

 

[radamfi]

Pavement cycling reduces dramatically when Dutch quality cycling infrastructure is in place. It is quite rare to see bikes on the footpath in the Netherlands when there is a cycle path adjacent. Red light infractions do exist there but are mitigated by using displays which show how long it is to wait until the lights are green. Lights also often turn green when a bike approaches and when turning right the cycle path typically continues around the corner without interruption so you never need to stop.

Would this thread exist on:

http://www.ovinnederland.nl/ ?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

You ought to visit railcam.nl and watch the level crossing most of the time it's fine, but I've seen numerous cyclists take the gamble with an approaching train.